The Concept of “Complex Hypostasis” of John the Grammarian of Caesaria and the Concept Severus’ of Antioch “Complex Nature” Analized as Borrowings of St. Cyril’s of Alexandria Image of Natures in Christ

The Concept of “Complex Hypostasis” of John the Grammarian of Caesaria and the Concept Severus’ of Antioch “Complex Nature” Analized as Borrowings of St. Cyril’s of Alexandria Image of Natures in ChristБогословский ВестникSyriaca.org: The Syriac Reference PortalThe National Endowment for the HumanitiesThe International Balzan Prize FoundationDavid A. Michelsoncbsc_adminRecord added to Zotero bycbsc_adminSyriaca.org: The Syriac Reference Portalhttp://syriaca.org/cbss/MN56YFYF/tei

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.

2025-05-20-05:00

Born digital.

CREATED: This bibl record was autogenerated from a Zotero record.Sergey A.KozhukhovThe Concept of “Complex Hypostasis” of John the Grammarian of Caesaria and the Concept Severus’ of Antioch “Complex Nature” Analized as Borrowings of St. Cyril’s of Alexandria Image of Natures in Christhttp://syriaca.org/cbss/MN56YFYFhttps://www.zotero.org/groups/a_comprehensive_bibliography_on_syriac_studies/items/MN56YFYFhttps://www.zotero.org/groups/4861694/items/MN56YFYFБогословский Вестник1-2 [20-21]2016147-168In this article the A. explores one of the eposodes of the polemic that began among the followers and opponents of the Council of Chalcedon, which established the teaching on the two natures of the incarnate Christ, united in one single hypostasis, or one person, the Son of God. The statute caused aversion to the Council among those, who rejected the fact that Christ possessed two natures after the incarnation. Both the proponents and the opponents of the Council appealed to the authority of St. Cyrill of Alexandria, interpreting in different ways the formulae and terminology. In the beginning of the VI cent. Severus of Antioch, bishop of Antioch (512–518), was the leader of the opponents of the Council of Chalcedon. On the side of the proponents of the Council John the Grammarian of Caesaria was the leader. The formulae of “complex nature” and “complex hypostasis” express a very important aspect of the polemic between the two groups: both of them were trying to intepret the christology of St. Cyril in either an anti- or pro-chalcedonian way respectively. The first formula was presented by Severus as an interpretation of the union of two natures, the second – was acceptable to the followers of Chalcedon, and in particular to John the Grammarian, as an alternative. After analyzing the two abovementioned formulae the A. attempts to clarify their relationship with St. Cyril’s terminology and their aplicability to the teaching about the two natures of Christ. Kozhukhov, Sergey A. “The Concept of ‘Complex Hypostasis’ of John the Grammarian of Caesaria and the Concept Severus’ of Antioch ‘Complex Nature’ Analized as Borrowings of St. Cyril’s of Alexandria Image of Natures in Christ.” Богословский Вестник 1-2 [20-21] (2016): 147–68. Sergey A. Kozhukhov, The Concept of ‘Complex Hypostasis’ of John the Grammarian of Caesaria and the Concept Severus’ of Antioch ‘Complex Nature’ Analized as Borrowings of St. Cyril’s of Alexandria Image of Natures in Christ, Богословский Вестник 1-2 [20-21] (2016): 147–68.